[Advaita-l] Samvadi Brama

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

"An inebriated gentleman was moving
gently along the street carrying in his
hand an empty box with perforations in
the lid and sides. It appeared that he was
carrying some live animal in it. An ac-
quaintance stopped him and asked, 'What have you got in the box ? ' ' It is
a mongoose,' replied the tipsy one. ' What on earth for ? ' ' Well, you
know how it is
with me, I'm not very drunk now, but I
shall soon be, and when I am, I see snakes around and am scared of them.
That is what I have the mongoose for, to protect me.'
'But good heavens, those are just imaginary
snakes ! ' 'Thats all right,' said the drunk
reassuringly, ' this also is an imaginary
mongoose ! '  The box was empty...."
(Story told by Late Swami Yatiswarananada ji of Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama,
Bengaluru)


On Wed 22 Aug, 2018, 8:57 AM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> http://talkandcomment.com/p/be0d2a70c55338b4e741402b (voice note)
>
> regards
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 8:10 AM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:48 PM Aditya Kumar via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Namaste,
> >> Sometimes we may confuse a rope for a snake but sometimes we may
> >> encounter an actual snake. Prior to both the outcomes, the person who is
> >> seeing the snake is in a state of uncertainty. Regardless of the both
> the
> >> outcomes, the person clearly sees either the rope or the snake. So the
> true
> >> svarupa of an object is necessary for an outcome. So once the person
> sees
> >> the actual lamp or jewel or rope or snake, it is not a brama anymore
> even
> >> in the illustration. Brama is applicable only as long as the person is
> not
> >> certain. So I wonder why this illustration or a redundant concept is
> >> brought up to explain nothing. We see samsara due to erroneous view and
> it
> >> is ought to be sublated by the correct knowledge, samyag darshana. So
> how
> >> is it that the Upanishads are declared as brama? Is brahma-jnana a
> brama?
> >> Doesn't erroneous knowledge lead to wrong perception? The
> >> example/illustration given in panchadashi is not at all satisfactory
> >> because unlike the confused person in pursuit of the jewel, the
> Upanishads
> >> are certain about Brahman.
> >> The objects of meditation cannot be brama because everyone knows it is
> >> kalpita. Is there no difference between a kalpana or a mental object or
> >> even a physical object or a symbol and a brama which is erroneous
> notion?
> >> How can anyone meditate on an erroneous notion? The erroneous view of a
> >> snake could be sublated by another erroneous notion and we may see a
> tail
> >> of a monkey. But eventually, we have to see its true svarupa. How can
> >> erroneous notion show us the true svarupa of Brahman or anything for
> that
> >> matter? There seems to be no such concept in Shankara's commentaries or
> >> prakarana texts. If there is any mention of the word samvadi brama or an
> >> explanation of the concept with an illustration is available, I request
> the
> >> members to kindly share the reference.
> >>
> >
> > All scripture-taught upasanas are no more than kalpana-s, imagining a
> > particular devatA form or a concept as taught in the scripture.  The
> phalam
> > of such kalpana is also specified therein.
> >
> >
> >> The upasaka uses the mind's kalpanashakti to 'realize' something the
> >>> shastra enjoins.  That vishnu resides in the sAligrama stone is only an
> >>> adhyAropa approved by the shAstra. All consecration of idols/temples
> is on
> >>> this principle.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >> RV: The worship of saligrama shila is not kalpana. It is shrauddha
> vidhi.
> >>
> >
> > If you read Shankaracharya's bhashya you will come across this idea:
> >
> > व्याप्तेश्च समञ्जसम्  । ब्रह्मसूत्र ३,३.९  । [BSB 3.3.9 beginning part]
> >
> > तत्राध्यासो नाम
> > द्वयोर्वस्तुनोरनिवर्तितायामेवान्यतरबुद्धावन्यतरबुद्धिरध्यस्यते   ।
> >
> > यस्मिन्नितरबुद्धिरध्यस्यतेऽनुवर्तत एव
> > तस्मिंस्तद्बुद्धिरध्यस्तेतरबुद्धावपि   ।
> >
> > यथा नाम्नि ब्रह्मबुद्धावध्यस्यमानायामप्यनुवर्तत एव नामबुद्धिर्न
> > ब्रह्मबुद्ध्या निवर्तते   । यथावा प्रतिमादिषु विष्ण्वादिबुद्ध्यध्यासः ।
> >
> >
> > [pl. read the English translation of the first three or four sentences,
> if
> > necessary.]
> >
> >
> > http://talkandcomment.com/p/ed300be165eade21a1f830f0 (voice note)
> >
> > regards
> > subbu
> >
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> >> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> >> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >>
> >> For assistance, contact:
> >> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>